linux-kernel - Re: tps65219/am62p kernel oops

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250430080109.GA65078@francesco-nb>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 10:01:09 +0200
From: Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>
To: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
Cc: Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>,
	Jerome Neanne <jneanne@...libre.com>,
	Shree Ramamoorthy <s-ramamoorthy@...com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
	Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
	Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>,
	Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@....fi>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>,
	Roger Quadros <rogerq@...nel.org>, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: tps65219/am62p kernel oops

On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 06:52:40PM +0200, Andreas Kemnade wrote:
> Am Tue, 29 Apr 2025 15:21:19 +0200
> schrieb Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>:
> 
> > Hello all,
> > while working on adding support in mainline for a new board based on TI
> > AM62P SoC I noticed the following Kernel Oops.
> > 
> > This oops was reproduced running current Linux
> > master, 6.15.0-rc4+, ca91b9500108d4cf083a635c2e11c884d5dd20ea, but I was able
> > to reproduce the same with 6.14.4.
> > 
> 
> [...]
> > [  +0.000022] Call trace:
> > [  +0.000011]  regulator_notifier_call_chain+0x20/0xa4 (P)
> > [  +0.000018]  tps65219_regulator_irq_handler+0x34/0x80
> 
> wild guessing: maybe because irqdata->rdev is not initalized in
> _probe()? At least I do not see where it would be initialized.

your wild guess seems correct, I'll send a proper patch with your
suggested-by after doing a couple of more tests, thanks.

Francesco